Perceived Effectiveness of Implemented Adaptation Measures

The indicator measures people’s perceptions of how effective the measures they used were for adapting to selected, locally visible, effects of climate change (e.g. droughts, floods). Although such data might be quite subjective. It provides insights into people’s experience and the likelihood of them using the measures are in the longer-term.

Determine the indicator's value by using the following methodology:

1) Define the promoted adaptation measure(s). Ensure that you are very specific – for example, if you are promoting ‘intercropping’, specify for which crops and how this method should be used.

2) For each measure, define which specific effect of climate change it is addressing. For example, it can be ‘flash floods coming to this area’ or ‘a longer period of time without rain during the main agricultural season’.

3) For each measure, design an interview question that you will use to assess whether the respondents think that the measure was effective in adapting to the specific effect of climate change. Ensure that all questions are specific enough without leading the respondent to a particular answer. For example: “Sometimes, during the main agricultural season, there are times when it does not rain for a longer period of time and there is drought. In your opinion, to what extent has mulching helped you with protecting your maize from drought? Would you say that it was very helpful, quite helpful or not very helpful?”

4) If you are assessing respondents’ perceptions of several adaptations measures, decide on how many measures they need to perceive as ‘effective’ in order to be considered ‘thinking that the promoted measures are effective in adapting to the effects of climate change’ (e.g. at least 2 out of 3 promoted measures).

5) Conduct interviews with a representative sample of your target group members, assessing:

     - whether they used the promoted measure(s) (follow this guidance)

     - if so, the extent to which they think that the measure(s) they used were effective (using the questions defined in point 3)

6) To calculate the indicator’s value:

     - count the number of respondents who have used the promoted measure(s) and found it / them effective (if you ask about several measures, follow point 4) 

     - divide this number by the total number of respondents who have used the promoted measure(s)

     - multiply the result by 100 to convert it to a percentage

Disaggregate the data by gender, age group, location, and other criteria relevant to the context and focus of your intervention.

1) While people’s perceptions are often seen as something subjective, something that does not provide ‘reliable evidence’, they have a major impact on people’s willingness to adopt and keep using the promoted measures. If people think that the measures they tried did not work, it is very unlikely that they will keep using them in the long-term. That is why the data collected by this indicator is so important. 

2) The effects of some measures are visible only after a longer period of time. It is recommended that you use this indicator only for measures whose effects the respondents were able to experience; otherwise, you might get unreliable data.

3) If a respondent has used a promoted measure and thinks that it was not effective, it is highly recommended that 1) the survey asks why s/he thinks that the measure was not effective and 2) such data is then used in subsequent programming.

4) In addition to reporting on the overall indicator value, also report on the perceived effectiveness of the individual adaptation measures (e.g., how many respondents think that mulching was effective, how many think that intercropping was effective, etc.).

5) When reporting on the indicator’s value, report not only on the percentage of respondents who perceived the measures as effective but also on the percentage of respondents who were not sure whether they were effective or not.